The Business Ethics and Law at Delectables Corp - Assignment Example

Business Law and Ethics PART A I will start by informing Delectables Corp. directors about the issues taking place in the organization ranging from the working condition to the quality assurance problems. I will only consider blowing the whistle only if the Board of Directors will not respond to the problems raised. It is no doubt that a number of questions will be ringing in my mind before making the final move with respect to the situation at hand. I will ask myself about the present state of the organization with respect to the quality assurance, the conduct of subordinates, and the working condition of every member of the organization. The next question will be what should be the ideal state with respect to working condition, and quality assurance. The next question involves what is the minimally accepted state with respect to working condition and quality assurance. The Next question I will ask is what steps and procedures should we put in place to ensure that we significantly improve our present situation to the minimally accepted state. The last question is what procedures we should use to raise from the minimally accepted state to the ideal state. I will use utilitarian theory of business ethics. I prefer utilitarian theory because it lays high emphasis on ethical decisions that advance the most value to all the stakeholders while at the same time limiting amount of damages to the minimal number of participants as possible. Because I want well for the majority, my ethical decision should cause less harm to the stakeholders of Delectables Corp. while at the same time increasing value for everyone. The decision of whether to blow the whistle or not is one of the most challenging because it involves a lot of thinking. I will first thinking about the impact of blowing the whistle on the future performance of the company. Secondly, I will also have to think about the image of the company in the eyes of the public and external stakeholders. I will also have to think about the interest of various stakeholders in Delectables Corp especially investors and the employees. I will go for stakeholder model. This is because this model looks at the ethical practices of the company from a wider perspective rather than from investors’ angle only. The stakeholders’ model recognizes the role and contribution of different individuals towards success of the organization especially the customers, employees, suppliers, government, and creditors. It is undoubtedly that a wide range of risks is associated with blowing the whistle. The first risk associated with whistle blowing is loss of employment (Trimborn). I will not only put my job at risk but also of other employees. This claim can be justified by the fact that boycott of company products- peanut butter in the market will force the company to reduce its production, which in turn translates to job cuts to allow the company from insolvency owing to large salary and wages payout. The next major risk associated with whistle blowing is dissolution of the company. A company can lose its competitive edge owing to unethical and illegal practices, which can consequently lead to closing down of the company. Whistle blowing also put the company at the risk of losing its revenue. This can happen when the company is charged hefty fines for illegal practices or when the company loses its market share owing to unethical practices in manufacturing of peanut butter. Customers tend to shy away from companies that do not observe stipulated ethical and legal standard by industry the regulators, bylaws, or laws. Whistle blowing is not only risk as it also comes with a wide range of benefits. The first benefit of whistle blowing is the fact that it brings sanity in the operations of Delectables Corp. by ending wrongdoings such selling of peanut butter with questionable quality. Whistle blowing also protects the interest of key stakeholders especially customers especially if consumption of the service or product can lead to bodily harm or chronic health condition (Trimborn). A number of factors are put in consideration when trying to weigh the risk and benefits of making a decision. The fist consideration when weighing the cost and benefit involves the situation at hand. For instance, decision relating to health, environmental, safety and security issue can be settled for despite the fact that the cost might outweigh the benefits. Secondly, I have to prepare a list of costs and another one for benefits associated with particular decision and make comparison before making the final decision. I can also attach dollar value on the benefits and risks of a decision to establish the ratio of gain or loss depending on my decision. I cannot sign a quality control form when no quality control systems have been put in place to protect the health of consumers from hazardous products. 2). Advise to the management The management should improve the working conditions of its staff beginning with the office of the Quality Control Director to the factory floor. The management should consider remunerating its workforce adequately as this will motivate them. The management should work out an effective communication structure between the top-level officers and the subordinates to enhance cooperation between the staff. The management should develop code of ethics as well as compliance programs that must be distributed to all the stakeholders within the organization. The management should put in place Quality Assurance Systems such as close supervision and monitoring of the processes as well as considerable testing of the product-Peanut Butter at different stages. PART B It is good gesture that a government should be more responsive to the health and safety of its people and this goes to both the federal and the state governments. The federal government should provide national benchmarks for the safety and quality of food products imported, exported, and locally distributed. Secondly, the government should provide adequate financial resources to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure that they carry out their duties effectively. Georgian state government on the other hand should increase the number of staff responsible for inspecting companies in the state. This is because constrain in workforce has been the cause of failure to inspect unethical organizations such as Delectables Corp. The government should provide adequate funding for the operations of the state inspectors to ensure that they carry out thorough monitoring and inspections into the operations of Delectables Corp. The first challenge faced by government in dealing with food safety issue is resource constraint ranging from finance to workforce. The fact that the government is running a deficit budget is jeopardising effective engagement in wiping out unethical practices in companies such as Delectables. Just like the federal government, the state of Georgia should think about raising additional revenue to fund for effective monitoring and inspection into the affairs of Delectables. The state of Georgia should think of coming up with state code of ethics and compliance programs for all the companies in the state of Georgia. The government can make companies more socially responsible by imposing hefty penalties and embargoes on companies that are no socially responsible. Additionally the government should institute various laws and regulations that ensure that activities of the companies are do no harm people, environment, and the attained social good. The state should not let the companies regulate themselves. This is because the balance between maxing on company resources to increase profits and spending on non-profitable activities will make the companies lose the focus on regulation. Additionally, companies may overlook certain issues if they have been left to regulate themselves. PART C 1) Several legal and ethical issues are common in daily transactions that involve sale of food products both in the local and international markets. A number of countries have put in place stringent legal measure that must be adhered to by the importers, manufacturers, and exporters of food products. The conduct of Delectables Corp supervisor in planning to sell unsafe peanut butter in san Lopez raises a number of ethical and legal issues. Ethical issues Ignoring the health and safety of the people of San Lopez raises ethical concern taking into consideration that international business ethics calls for multinational organization not to harm the local consumers. The supervisor understands very well the peanut butter market red are unsafe for human consumption but she still think of dumping them in international country. Selling poor quality peanut butter also raises the ethical question of whether the company respect the international business ethics that calls for multinational corporations to do more good. International business ethics requires that exporters and importers of goods should do less harm to the locals. High consideration of company profits and the expense of human life also raise an ethical dilemma. The supervisor is interested in selling all the company products to increase company revenues thus failure to adhere to the international ethical theory of utilitarianism. There is also an ethical issue of whether the supervisor of Delectables respects the right in life of the San Lopez consumers. The International business ethics expect multinational organizations to treat local consumers with respect and dignity Legal issues Notable legal issue in the argument of the supervisor involve dumping of goods. It is illegal for a company to dump goods in another country. Breach of contractual liability is a legal issue evident in the argument of the supervisors. The manufacturers and marketers of edible goods has an implied contractual duty of supply food products that is safe and fit for human consumption (Keong). Liability of negligence is a critical legal issue imminent in the argument of the supervisor. All the manufacturers, importers, and exporters owe all consumers the duty of care and as such, they should not sell, or distribute food products that are unsafe or unfit for human consumption despite the fact that there is no express contract (Keong). 2) The analysis would not be different in the case of Peanut butter with yellow sticker. This is because the food product with the yellow stick is yet to be approved for human consumption. A number of tests have to be run on the batch with the yellow sticker before they are approved for consumption. If the company sells the food products with mild contamination this means that they have not adhered to the international business ethics of doing no harm, respect the right of consumers and do more good. PART D Delectables Corp should not risk engaging in such illegal transactions with the executives of the largest San Lopez supermarket chain and the San Lopez security officers. These transactions are considered illegal because the Foreign Corrupt Practice Act (FCPA) of 1977 prevents United States nationals from bribing foreign government officers with the object of getting business favours or retaining existing business. Works cited Keong, Rodney. Selling Or Supplying Unsafe Food: The Legal Issues. Rodyk, 2008. Web. Retrieved December 5 2011. Trimborn, Evelyn. Benefits & Harms of Whistle-blowing. Ehow, 2011. Web. Retrieved December 5, 2011. Read More